Harry Potter

[Gertabelle]

Another reason why Harry Potter has no place in a Catholic home: The entire plot of Harry Potter is based upon the moral pitfall that the “ends justify the means”. Sorcery is gravely immoral. Harry Potter is a sorcerer who uses sorcery to defeat another sorcerer. He spends years at school learning to become a sorcerer. He employs intrinsic evil to fight intrinsic evil. All magic/ sorcery - “white” or “black” - is a grave offense against Almighty God. To give our children the impression that magic can be employed for the purpose of good encourages them to embrace the “ends justify the means” fallacy.

Seriously, have you even read the books?

Sorcery?! This is a fairy tale!

I suppose you are also against the movie “Frozen” because Elsa has magical ice powers – Sorcery!

And what about the Percy Jackson books, which would be probably even more popular than the HP books if the movies weren’t so insanely horrible! I mean, the characters are all demigods! Sorcery!!

Peter Pan and Tinkerbell have magical powers and convince small children to run away from home in the middle of the night! – Sorcery!!

It just gets to the point of the ridiculous.

 

[R_H_Benson]

Seriously, have you even read the books?

Sorcery?! This is a fairy tale!

I suppose you are also against the movie “Frozen” because Elsa has magical ice powers – Sorcery!

And what about the Percy Jackson books, which would be probably even more popular than the HP books if the movies weren’t so insanely horrible! I mean, the characters are all demigods! Sorcery!!

Peter Pan and Tinkerbell have magical powers and convince small children to run away from home in the middle of the night! – Sorcery!!

It just gets to the point of the ridiculous.

Sorcery is gravely evil. The danger is amplified by how it is trivialized in all of the examples you listed, none of which have any place in a Catholic home. How about reading about the saints to the children instead? They led lives of adventure and heroism without dabbling in the grave evils of sorcery!

 

[pensmama87]

Sorcery is gravely evil. The danger is amplified by how it is trivialized in all of the examples you listed, none of which have any place in a Catholic home. How about reading about the saints to the children instead? They led lives of adventure and heroism without dabbling in the grave evils of sorcery!

So no fairy tales, either? Magic has a long history in fiction and is often a device for other things.

This reminds me of arguments that ALL fiction must be bad because it’s “lies.”:whacky:

 

[R_H_Benson]

So no fairy tales, either? Magic has a long history in fiction and is often a device for other things.

This reminds me of arguments that ALL fiction must be bad because it’s “lies.”:whacky:

Fiction and fairy tales are great! Just not the kinds that glorify and/or trivialize grave evil like Harry Potter does.

 

[Gertabelle]

Sorcery is gravely evil. The danger is amplified by how it is trivialized in all of the examples you listed, none of which have any place in a Catholic home. How about reading about the saints to the children instead? They led lives of adventure and heroism without dabbling in the grave evils of sorcery!

Ah, so now it comes out.

You are against ALL books or stories that have any plot lines or content that do not directly align with, support, or teach the Truth of the Catholic faith.

OK. Got it.

I’m done here.

 

[R_H_Benson]

Ah, so now it comes out.

You are against ALL books or stories that have any plot lines or content that do not directly align with, support, or teach the Truth of the Catholic faith.

OK. Got it.

I’m done here.

I am against all books that directly contradict the teachings of the Church, like Harry Potter does.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

We are all born with the inclination to sin. Does that mean we should sin? No. Sorcery - even if we are “born as a sorcerer” - is a grave sin if it is acted upon.

The elf Galadriel had the power to see into the hearts of sentient beings. Did she commit “grave sin” by using it?

Did the elf Glorfindel commit “grave sin” by using magic to make river water sweep away the Nazgul? Or Arwen, for doing that in the film version?

Etc. Again, the elves are NOT depicted as angelic beings. They have very long lives (they are not quite immortal since they can be killed through violence, and Arwen dies of a broken heart). I confess I haven’t read the Silmarillon, but I understand that reveals a lot of backstory about the elves, and much of it isn’t pretty. The Elves who inhabit Middle Earth were essentially banished there after committing a lot of crimes such as slaughtering women and children in battle.

So, if the “witches and wizards” of HP are evil for using magic, then to be consistent, you have to say the elves of Tolkien are, as well.

 

[jilly4ski]

In LOTR magic is always referred to as a power that is not natural to man and is always seeking to corrupt him. The characters in LOTR - even the powerful wizard Gandalf - is shy to use his magical abilities for this reason.

And yet Gandalf and the elves still use it, in everything from light bringing to making swords. Why can good characters use magic in LOTR but not in Harry Potter without making them intrinsically evil.

 

[styrgwillidar]

I am against all books that directly contradict the teachings of the Church, like Harry Potter does.

HP is a tale that one can choose to act morally or immorally. If you choose to act immorally you risk eternal damnation. If you attach yourself to things of this world, you damage your soul and risk eternal damnation. That the point of this life is one’s place in the next.

Exactly how does that contradict the teachings of the Church?

 

[estesbob]

I guess so.

I read both Harry Dresden books and Harry Potter books.

To my knowledge, I have not yet been demon possessed. At least to the best of my knowledge.

If I had to fight a Demon I’d pick Harry Dresden over Harry Potter!

 

[R_H_Benson]

The elf Galadriel had the power to see into the hearts of sentient beings. Did she commit “grave sin” by using it?

Did the elf Glorfindel commit “grave sin” by using magic to make river water sweep away the Nazgul? Or Arwen, for doing that in the film version?

Etc. Again, the elves are NOT depicted as angelic beings. They have very long lives (they are not quite immortal since they can be killed through violence, and Arwen dies of a broken heart). I confess I haven’t read the Silmarillon, but I understand that reveals a lot of backstory about the elves, and much of it isn’t pretty. The Elves who inhabit Middle Earth were essentially banished there after committing a lot of crimes such as slaughtering women and children in battle.

So, if the “witches and wizards” of HP are evil for using magic, then to be consistent, you have to say the elves of Tolkien are, as well.

And yet Gandalf and the elves still use it, in everything from light bringing to making swords. Why can good characters use magic in LOTR but not in Harry Potter without making them intrinsically evil.

Because the “magical powers” in LOTR are bestowed upon certain individuals by the equivalent of a “divine mandate”, not simply as something that rises up from within themselves. Much like how Moses parted the Red Sea.

 

[jilly4ski]

Because the magical powers in LOTR are bestowed upon certain individuals by the equivalent of a “divine mandate”, not simply as something that rises up from within themselves. Much like how Moses parted the Red Sea.

What does “rises up from within themselves” mean. It appears from actually reading the books, that the magic in Harry Potter is “bestowed upon certain individuals” by the “creator” of that fictional universe or if that universe is atheistic by virtue of one’s genetics.

 

[twf]

Because the “magical powers” in LOTR are bestowed upon certain individuals by the equivalent of a “divine mandate”, not simply as something that rises up from within themselves. Much like how Moses parted the Red Sea.

How do you know that’s not the case in the Potter universe? The source of magic is not really explained. Certain creatures, such as those born as wizards, seem to have natural magical abilities, just as the elves of Tolkien’s world do, but that doesn’t tell us where it came from originally… Harry inherited the “magical gene”, if you will, from his parents, but if you go back to the very first wizards where did their magic come from? That isn’t discussed in the books and is open to interpretation. What is clear is that no conjuring or invocations or pacts with demons of any sort are involved. Your hang up seems to be over words. These words mean something else in the fictional world that is the Potterverse than they mean here in the real world.
What I do know, as outlined in more detail in previous threads, is that it presents a Christian story of self-sacrifice and that the author explicitly drew upon the Gospel for inspiration. Dumbledore’s talk of “moving on” in the afterlife and the clear consequences for those who do evil, who maim their souls, imply that there is a higher power.

 

[R_H_Benson]

How do you know that’s not the case in the Potter universe? The source of magic is not really explained. Certain creatures, such as those born as wizards, seem to have natural magical abilities, just as the elves of Tolkien’s world do, but that doesn’t tell us where it came from originally… Harry inherited the “magical gene”, if you will, from his parents, but if you go back to the very first wizards where did their magic come from? That isn’t discussed in the books and is open to interpretation. What is clear is that no conjuring or invocations or pacts with demons of any sort are involved. Your hang up seems to be over words. **These words mean something else in the fictional world that is the Potterverse than they mean here in the real world. **
What I do know, as outlined in more detail in previous threads, is that it presents a Christian story of self-sacrifice and that the author explicitly drew upon the Gospel for inspiration. Dumbledore’s talk of “moving on” in the afterlife and the clear consequences for those who do evil, who maim their souls, imply that there is a higher power.

Try explaining that to an 11 year old kid.

“But mom! they communicated with the dead in Harry Potter and the ghost was really friendly! Why can’t I use the Ouija board?!?”

“But mom! I just want to try little spells like to help me get to sleep faster or to concentrate more on my homework! I won’t try anything dangerous!”

 

[jilly4ski]

Try explaining that to an 11 year old kid.

“But mom! they communicated with the dead in Harry Potter and the ghost was really friendly! Why can’t I use the Ouija board?!?”

“But mom! I just want to try little spells like to help me get to sleep faster or to concentrate more on my homework! I won’t try anything dangerous!”

LOL, because an 11 year old (at least a mentally healthy 11 year old) knows that ghosts are not going to appear before them and talk, and know that they don’t have the power to affect the physical world.

Besides, they didn’t receive their Hogwarts (or the American equivalent) letter when they turned 10.

 

[R_H_Benson]

LOL, because an 11 year old (at least a mentally healthy 11 year old) knows that ghosts are not going to appear before them and talk, and know that they don’t have the power to affect the physical world.

Ahh, so you think it is all just a big joke?

 

[Lou2U]

Try explaining that to an 11 year old kid.

I think 11 year olds are better at working out what’s fiction and what isn’t than you believe.

“But mom! they communicated with the dead in Harry Potter and the ghost was really friendly! Why can’t I use the Ouija board?!?”

Except that coming back as a ghost is not portrayed in a positive light. When Harry speaks to one of the ghosts, he says he was afraid of death:

“I was afraid of death. I chose to remain behind. I sometimes wonder whether I oughtn’t to have… well, that is neither here nor there… in fact, I am neither here nor there… I know nothing of the secrets of death, Harry, for I chose my feeble imitation of life instead.”

It isn’t anything like a Ouija board. Secondly, none of the ghosts are shown to be particularly happy with their “life” - Myrtle is forever an upset teenager, unable to mature, the Bloody Baron wears chains as a result of stabbing another ghost at Hogwarts, who is shown to be very bitter.

"“But mom! I just want to try little spells like to help me get to sleep faster or to concentrate more on my homework! I won’t try anything dangerous!”

The spells are not real, which has been shown by many posters. Of course, 11 years olds can attempt to use them, but nothing will happen .

Lou

 

[styrgwillidar]

Try explaining that to an 11 year old kid.

“But mom! they communicated with the dead in Harry Potter and the ghost was really friendly! Why can’t I use the Ouija board?!?”

“But mom! I just want to try little spells like to help me get to sleep faster or to concentrate more on my homework! I won’t try anything dangerous!”

The vast majority of 11 year olds understand that HP is a fictional world and there are no such things as spells to help them with their homework or sleep faster. Even if he ‘bought into’ the HP world he’s still out of luck as a muggle-- no inherent ability to do anything ‘magical’. Magic in the HP world being more like a mutant capability a la X-men then something that can be acquired. There are no Ouija boards in HP and divination/prophesy is mocked, belittled and in fact part of the downfall of the antagonist is their actually putting credence in a prophesy and acting on it vice ignoring it.

 

[R_H_Benson]

What many of you are choosing to ignore is that while the spells / ghosts etc. of Harry Potter are indeed fictional, they awaken REAL curiosities in the minds of children. They begin to dabble in the real thing. First, maybe with a Ouija board at a sleep-over party. Then they pick up a “spell book” at Barnes and Noble (those are big sellers nowadays…coincidence?). Before you know it, they have adopted a view that “Hey, the occult isn’t all that bad.” And WHAM! they’ve lost their Faith. It is happening all the time. Satan will infiltrate wherever he can to spread the seed of doubt and indifferentism.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Ahh, so you think it is all just a big joke?

Absolutely not. There is a Satan, there are demons, messing around with Ouija boards is a bad thing.

We owe it to our kids to teach them, explain to them about these things vice pretending these things don’t exist. I appreciate the concern/position that a work of literature may spark a fascination in someone which they then follow and leads them to investigate the occult. But that fascination is a factor in the audience, and if you are concerned that magic in a compelling work of fiction can spark that fascination— then the depiction by the author and their intent is irrelevant. Let me repeat that— the intention of Tolkien, Rowlings, or C.S. Lewis isn’t germane. Because they can’t know ahead of time whether that spark will arise because it is dependent on the audience, not them.

So, I will buy into the argument that magic in fantasy is bad and should be avoided. But its then present in every fictional work with magic.

As you stated, in reality there’s no such thing as black or white magic because occult/sorcery is dealing with powers outside oneself. So, no matter the ‘ground rules’ in a specific piece of literature we may cite, if a member of the audience becomes motivated to explore things in the real world, then they all lead to the same dangerous path.